By Emeka Alex Duru
You would have noticed the needless fuss among President Bola Tinubu’s aides over the call by the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) presidential candidate, Peter Obi, for his resignation. They are clearly on the loose.
To be sure, Obi’s suggestion was democratic and innocuous. It was in reaction to developments in the United Kingdom that saw the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer announcing his resignation from the office and as leader of the Labour Party.
In taking the decision, Starmer said he had accepted that his party no longer believes he is the best person to lead it into the next general election. That is demonstration of statesmanship – knowing when to throw in the towel!
Starmer’s action informed Obi’s call on Tinubu to follow suit, given the obvious failure of his governance, which has seen Nigerians boxed into a corner by insecurity and further sliding into poverty line from 87 million when the President came to power to an estimated 140 million, currently.
Obi’s demand is both patriotic and democratic. That is what should be expected of a principled opposition figure or party in a presidential or parliamentary system of government, considering the piteous level the administration in the land has drawn the country to.
Unfortunately, rather than engage with the substance of the argument, the presidency chose to respond with insults, distortions, and self-adulation over phantom accomplishments.
In a statement emitting anger and venom, the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, dismissed Obi’s suggestion as not only misplaced but also a reflection of selective and distorted view of Nigeria’s realities.
To be fair, Onanuga is the president’s spokesperson and his job entails defending the indefensible. And as my colleague, Ikechukwu Amaechi has rightly observed, Onanuga is not one to be envied because it is a near impossible job to defend the Tinubu administration without looking like a clown.
It can therefore be understood why he is engaging in shadow-boxing - a form of defence mechanism.
Defence mechanisms, according to dictionary definitions, are unconscious psychological strategies the mind uses to protect one from anxiety, distressing thoughts, and threats to self-esteem. The snag is that while the mechanisms offer temporary relief, over-reliance on them can prevent one from addressing underlying problems.
This is the trouble with the Tinubu administration. It is one presidency that has never owned up to any responsibility nor admitted any mistakes in policies and programmes, but rather hangs its errors on the opposition and previous administrations. The government lives and thrives on self-denial.
The most ridiculous aspect of the defence was the argument by Onanuga that “We run a presidential system, with the president elected to a fixed 4-year term.” This is puerile and incomprehensible. Nigeria is not running a divine monarchy in which the king derives his authority directly from God, making him accountable only to Him rather than to any earthly authority like a parliament and the people.
Even at that, there are inbuilt systems of calling the monarch to order when he is going astray. Similarly, in the traditional African political systems, there were established procedures to ask rulers who had failed to leave.
In the Old Oyo Empire, an Alaafin (king) who had lost the confidence of his people was forced to abdicate by being presented with an empty calabash or a dish of parrot’s eggs from the Oyo Mesi (the supreme council of kingmakers). This symbolic act was a definitive order to commit ritual suicide.
In Igbo land, such actions were carried out through boycotts and protests by interest groups. That was the major challenge of the Warrant Chief administration in some parts of Igbo land, particularly the South East between 1891 and 1929. The warrant chiefs, who were appointed by the British colonial authorities for ease of administration and collection of taxes, at some point, grew rich illicitly and began to exercise authorities that were not originally bestowed on them.
Subsequent reactions to the corruption in the system counted among the factors that led to the famous Women’s Revolt of 1929 in Eastern Nigeria (narrowly referred to as Aba Women Riot in some instances). The upheaval compelled the colonial masters to abolish the warrant chieftains the following year, 1930. That was then!
But we are in a democracy, a system of government, which Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States, rightly defined as the government of the people, for the people, by the people. The defining character of a democracy is that power belongs to the people, which they exercise through their elected representatives.
When an official, in this case, the president performs below the expectations, he can be asked to quit or get impeached. Tinubu resigning from office, would not have been the first of its kind in history, truth be told. Instances abound of leaders who had resigned under different circumstances in many parts of the world.
In the United States, President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 over the Watergate scandal. In Brazil, Fernando Collor de Mello, the 32nd president was forced to resign in 1992, on account of corruption allegations. On March 23, 2018, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, President of Peru, resigned from office on charges of corruption, while in Argentina, Fernando de la Rúa stepped down during a severe economic and social crisis.
These examples demonstrate that resignation is not incompatible with presidential systems but remains a recognised, though rare, feature of accountability in presidential democracies.
Back home, Tinubu, while in opposition, had through his official Twitter handle, on November 6, 2014, urged the then President Goodluck Jonathan to resign. In the tweet Tinubu stated; “Why should any part of this country be under occupation? In any civilised country, Jonathan should resign.” Tinubu had earlier on April 14, 2014, tweeted “The festering Boko Haram attacks on the North East and massacre of innocent citizens is concrete proof that Nigeria has no government”.
Tinubu’s anger, then, was that Nigeria was drifting to a failed state, where the government could not protect the citizens in the face of hunger and murderous attacks by gunmen. Ironically, events had not reached the worrisome dimensions they have now attained when Tinubu took the gauntlet against Jonathan.
The present situation is scary and bizarre. Between January and May 2026, no fewer than 5,273 Nigerians are reported to have been killed by bandits in violence-related circumstances. According to Nigeria Watch (an organisation that specialises in monitoring violence across the country), 222,137 people were killed in 46,182 violent attacks across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) between 2025 and May, 2026. Out of this number, 2,350 Nigerians were murdered in the first three months of 2026, and 1,402 still in kidnappers’ den.
Figures from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), revealed that a staggering N2.23 trillion was paid as ransom by families of kidnapped victims. Reports by SBM Intelligence (a security intel gathering firm) also showed that, out of N48 billion ransom demanded by kidnappers, N2.5bn was paid from 4,722 abductions.
As you read this piece, not less than 45 students and teachers abducted from Baptist Nursery and Primary School, Yawota; Community Grammar School and L.A. Primary School in Esiele, Oriire Local Government Area of Oyo State on May 15, are still held hostage, tormented and dehumanised by their captors. The hapless kids would have spent over five weeks inside the forest subjected to most harrowing of abuses and molestations.
One of the kidnapped teachers, Michael Oyedokun, was beheaded by the bandits inside the bush. At the time the kids in Oyo were seized, Boko Haram terrorists also attacked Mussa Primary and Junior Secondary School in Askira/Uba Local Government Area, in Borno State, and abducted 42 students. Their fate remains unknown.
Hunger is equally hitting hard on the citizens. It is such bad that Nigeria is now officially listed in the highest-risk category of the United Nations global hunger hotspots, ranked 115th in the global hunger index. An estimated 31 million Nigerians are projected to face acute food insecurity.
On streets and roads in major cities like Lagos, it is common these days to come across colonies of beggars bearing placards with such inscriptions as “Ebin pa wa” (we are dying of hunger); “Akwai yuwa” (there is hunger). They tell the story of the time.
These are ordinarily, not lazy citizens but Nigerians uprooted from their homes and displaced from their farms and various businesses. They have become beggars and vagabonds overnight. Yet, the government is not offering them hope and protection.
What is therefore wrong in Peter Obi asking President Tinubu to resign, given his failure in his basic constitutional duty of guaranteeing the security and welfare to the people, in line with Section 14 (2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)? Is there need for the grandstand by Bayo Onanuga on the matter? In plain term, the fuss over the demand by Obi for Tinubu’s resignation, is simply misplaced and begs the question.
~Emeka Alex Duru, Ph.D., is the Editor, TheNiche Newspapers, Lagos
0 comments:
Post a Comment